BRT Scores - Our Scored Corridors
As Bus Rapid Transit systems are implemented around the world, some systems fall on the border of whether or not they meet BRT Basics. The ITDP does not and cannot score all corridors, and BRTData.org's database is a constant work in progress.
Here at the Metro Route Atlas, when we encounter one of these lower-grade unscored corridors or corridors listed as Not BRT on BRTData.org, we need a way to justify a ranking for the system. Therefore, as of May 2021, prior to entering the quagmire that is Venezuela (containing nearly a half dozen BRT? corridors that we need to classify), we set up a system here for ranking corridors independently.
Now, for the disclaimers. The first thing to note is that it is not always possible to fill in scores for certain design aspects. This means that we are defaulting to 0 points for any field where we cannot make a judgment. Of the BRT Basics, we are entirely dependent on news articles to determine scores for intersection treatment, and are entirely dependent on videos, Google streetview, and publications for determining platform level boarding. Being classified as BRT or BRT-Lite is often the deciding aspect of whether or not a city gets a page on the Metro Route Atlas at all.
BRT Standard Version: 2016
2016 Standard Minimum Requirements:
- At least 3km length with dedicated lanes
- Score 4 or more points in dedicated right-of-way element
- Score 4 or more points in busway alignment element
- Score 20 or more points across all five BRT Basics elements
If a corridor meets the second and third requirements but fails at least one of the other two, we consider the corridor BRT-Lite. BRT-Lite corridors, if the only rapid transit style corridor in a city, result in the city not getting a page on the website (e.g. Mexicali). We only calculate a design score here - it is impossible to measure operational deductions without being on-site, riding the system.
Please note that only the dedicated right of way portion of the corridor is scored for the vast majority of components as per ITDP 2016 scoring convention. Lengths of corridors involve half the full round trip length.
Mexicali, Baja California, Mexico - Línea Express 1
Notes: On March 11, 2021, we ran Mexicali through BRT Basics. Even if only the dedicated busway was scored, it failed enough of BRT Basics that it became the first city to be dropped from scope. While the MRA scoring process was not formalized until May 2021, our process for Mexicali is what inspired it.
Monterrey, Nuevo León, Mexico - Transmetro Guadalupe
Notes: Transmetro Guadalupe was the first corridor that required us to formally determine if it was BRT standard or not. As BRTData.org had Acabús in Acapulco labeled as 'Not BRT', we ran through Transmetro Guadalupe using the 2016 standard.
Querétaro, Querétaro, Mexico - Eje Constitucion de 1917
Notes: Querétaro was the first city that was added to the Metro Route Atlas after running corridors through BRT Basics (which is clearly passed)
Querétaro, Querétaro, Mexico - Eje Avenida de la Luz
Acapulco, Guerrero, Mexico - Acabús Ruta Principal
Notes: Acapulco was the first city that was added to the Metro Route Atlas after running corridors through BRT Basics and coming up with a different opinion on classification than BRTData.org.
2016 BRT Standard (Template)
Standard Version: 2016